From: David Carlton <carlton@math.stanford.edu>
To: Michael Elizabeth Chastain <mec@shout.net>
Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
Subject: Re: [patch] kfail gdb.c++/annota2.exp annotate-quit
Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2002 11:01:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ro1vg1pkgpa.fsf@jackfruit.Stanford.EDU> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200212190547.gBJ5lnN24237@duracef.shout.net>
On Wed, 18 Dec 2002 23:47:49 -0600, Michael Elizabeth Chastain <mec@shout.net> said:
> The KFAIL line looks like this:
> KFAIL: gdb.c++/annota2.exp: annotate-quit (PRMS: c++/544)
> We can't do anything about the "PRMS:" part, that comes from dejagnu.
> I have an objection to the name "c++/544". It is way too easy for
> this name to get quoted out of context (the context being that it is
> a gdb bug in the gdb database). I think this will cause confusion.
> I would like to see "gdb/544" here.
> Sure, right *now* while we are discussing the issue, everyone knows
> that "c++/544" means a gdb bug in the gdb PR database. Wait six
> weeks and then quote some people a gdb.sum report that says
> "c++/482" in it and see if anyone jumps to the incorrect conclusion
> that c++/482 means a bug in the C++ compiler.
I certainly don't think that it should say "c++/544", simply because
it's not a C++ bug: I'm planning to change the category in GNATS
today. (But to what? tui?)
I have mixed feelings about whether or not it should say
"gdb/<number>" or "<category>/<number>". I guess I don't find your
reasoning convincing: it's part of the GDB test suite, so I would
expect people to think that a bug "c++/<number>" refers to a bug in
GDB's C++ support. (Which is normally correct, though I think not in
this particular case.)
On the other hand, I'm not yet convinced that the categories are
completely stable, and it's silly to either spend time changing the
test suite whenever a bug gets refiled or having the test suite and
GNATS not agree on the categories in question. And listing bugs as
"gdb/<number>" gets around that problem nicely.
On the other hand, if somebody has gone to the effort of KFAILing a
test, then chances are that the bug in question has been analyzed
enough to be filed correctly, so maybe the categories are stable after
all.
So I'm torn. That's one vote for "waffle" from me, and for "gdb" from
Michael; anybody else?
David Carlton
carlton@math.stanford.edu
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2002-12-19 18:27 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2002-12-19 7:42 Michael Elizabeth Chastain
2002-12-19 11:01 ` David Carlton [this message]
2002-12-19 13:48 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2002-12-20 9:12 ` Andrew Cagney
2002-12-20 10:09 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2002-12-20 10:50 ` David Carlton
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2002-12-18 20:57 David Carlton
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=ro1vg1pkgpa.fsf@jackfruit.Stanford.EDU \
--to=carlton@math.stanford.edu \
--cc=gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com \
--cc=mec@shout.net \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox